Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: When absolutes aren't absolutes and constructs aren't constructs

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jeremy" <jnorthct AT hotmail.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
  • Subject: Re: When absolutes aren't absolutes and constructs aren't constructs
  • Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 04:50:29 -0400


> Subject: When absolutes aren't absolutes and constructs aren't constructs
> Author: "Henry Churchyard" <churchh AT crossmyt.com>
> Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 09:38:04 -0500 (CDT)

> The whole absolute vs. construct state distinction is not as relevant
> for numerals as it is for ordinary nouns, since the main uses of the
> construct state are to signal noun-noun compounds, or possession, but
> when a numeral precedes a noun, then such a phrase is not actually
> either a "compound" or a possessor-possessed situation in any true
> sense. So in the numerals there are forms which cannot be classified
> as being either contruct or absolute (e.g. "sh@neym" and "shteym" in
> "sh@neym-`asar" and "shteym-`esre"), forms which act quite differently
> from nouns with parallel morphology (e.g. the numerals from 20-90 end
> with masculine plural "-im" ending, but do not form constructs ending
> in "-ey" as nouns do), etc.

But cardinals from three to ten place ‘tau’ at the end to indicate the
masculine construct, which, while not following the normal morphology of
adding ‘yod,’ does provide a consistent classificatory scheme for
distinguishing absolute numerals from constructs (at least for the
masculine forms for numerals from three to ten). What I don’t get is why,
in certain instances, a numeral is employed in its absolute form and, for
an identical expression, the construct form is employed. Take, for
example, Lev 27:6, where “five shekels of silver” writes “five” in its
absolute form, but in “three shekels of silver” in the same verse, writes
“three” in its construct form. There must be some basis for the occasional
variations that take place other than those of grammar, such as regional
or period differences. Or am I to understand from what you are saying
that the construct rules for numbers were somewhat ill-defined and, hence,
it was left to each individual scribe to decide which way to go?

By the way, I was wondering if you know of any good references dealing
with the syntax and orthography of OT numerals? Apart from a few
introductory pages in “Learning Biblical Hebrew”-type books, I haven’t
come across much in the way of a systematic study.

- Jeremy




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page